Developer unfairly bashed
Regarding Amber Waldref and Andy Billig’s column of April 19:
I find it offensive that the developer in this case is being described as unwilling to follow the neighborhood’s plan. What is known is the fact that the developer bought the property, designed a building and was given a building permit because it met all city codes and requirements. Why would a private property owner have an obligation to ask a neighborhood organization what they can do with their own property?
Equally troubling is the comparison of Hamilton Street to Garland Avenue or South Perry Street. Hamilton is a five-lane arterial with a direct connection on and off Interstate 90. The other roads are two lanes wide with a 20 mph speed limit.
Hamilton will never be a pedestrian-friendly road merely due to the volume of traffic on it. If the neighborhood wants a pedestrian commercial area, why not move westward away from Hamilton instead of trying to choke down an important road.
Finally, instead of spending the time characterizing a private property owner as a villain, the neighborhood and its representatives should put the effort into looking at what encourages development instead of what discourages it.